There are several layers to this deception, several "truths" if you will:

1. The first "truth" is that Muslim terrorists did it. NIST's mission is to support this. Many, if not most, Americans believe some version of this.
2. The second "truth" is that it was an inside job, a controlled demolition done with thermite. AE911Truth's mission is to support this truth, stopping people from researching further. Most of /r/conspiracy believes this truth and will, I've learned, attack you if you look further. But it leaves many questions unanswered: What turned the buildings into dust? What caused the radiation?
3. The third truth is that it was a nuclear demolition. This truth must never, ever come out, as thousands of WTC first responders and recovery workers have needlessly contracted thyroid cancer, prostate cancer, leukemia, and many other cancers as a result of the radiation. And it demonstrates the elites' parasites' willingness to use nuclear devices for false flag operations. (The DEW, directed energy weapon, theory by Judy Woods is disinfo to try to steer people away from this.) Talk about this truth, and you'll get attacked from all angles, including the mods.
4. Is there a deeper truth? I suppose one has to keep that option open.

Man I could say that the rabbit hole goes deeper than you'd expect. I am gonna keep an open mind about this nuclear demolition theory.

I believe nukes are more plausible than most of the explanations, though I don't rule any other possibilities like directed-energy weapons (DEWs) or other explanations out. In my view, however, controlled demolition by thermite seems highly unlikely considering that a demolition would have left much more physical debris than what we saw, which was tons of dust, pulverized material, and just some horrifically twisted pieces of metal. Additionally, thermite causes a super-bright, fireball-like reaction, and we definitely didn't see two pillars of fire falling. I feel as though controlled demolition was actually used on WTC7 in order to more easily spread the idea that the Twin Towers were brought down in the same way. That day is still too painful for most to keep investigating, so they'll usually stop searching once they hear of the easy explanation of controlled demolition. Never mind the fact that controlled demolitions do not act the way that the towers did when they fell. Even in saying all that, I'm more than willing to be wrong. For more on the nuke theory:

• Thermite Hoax - 9/11 WTC an Act of Nuclear War Part 1/3
• Thermite Hoax - 9/11 WTC an Act of Nuclear War Part 2/3
• Thermite Hoax - 9/11 WTC an Act of Nuclear War Part 3/3
• Doctors Baffled as 9/11 1st Responders Have 11000% Increase Thyroid Cancer

For more on the directed-energy weapon theory (DEW):

• Controlled Opposition Promotes Demolition
• Brookhaven DEW Part 1
• Brookhaven DEW Part 2
• Brookhaven DEW Part 3
• Brookhaven DEW Part 4

Finally, for more understanding as to why our world is so messed up:

• Why Do You Want Me to Lie to You? The Truth is Now Socially Unacceptable
• Coping with Our Collapsing Cartoon World
• Our Cartoon World and Why Many Cannot See It for What It Is
• Sometimes the Bad Guy Wins

Yea, there's probably a deeper truth. If I were to speculate, I'd lean more toward the notion that most of your 9/11 "memories" are composite sketches retraced from a made-for-televison movie complete with live commentary layered in like a DVD special feature.

That's pure speculation though. Would also help explain the "dustification" in a non-nuke context.

Hehehe..... Wow. Yeah I'm not on that level.

1000X more plausible than [inside job + "micronukes"], imo. Still unlikely though.

It was not a nuclear demolition. There were no EMP effects or charged-particle radiation effects to the many on-scene video cameras.

Thermite could easily turn the building to dust. Concrete turns to dust at those temperatures, and steel burns and turns to ash.

Yeah, it was.

I actually found a great example of EMP effect from a helicopter. (Because the detonation was underground, most of the escaping EMF radiation was directed upwards -- picked up better by helicopter than a ground-based camera.) The nuclear detonation (and EMP pulse) is about 10-11 seconds before the collapse. So start a countdown from 10 when the interference first hits:

• EMP Evidence From Nuclear Detonation at 9/11 (about 10 seconds before collapse)

Thermite can't turn a building to dust. It's used as a cutting charge. Are you suggesting they slathered thermite all over every square inch of the WTC buildings? And even if they did.. What about the thousands of ceramic toilets and bathroom fixtures?

And what about the nuclear radiation that gave so many WTC first responders thyroid cancer and leukemia? Asbestos can give you lung cancer -- not leukemia.

Only nukes can explain all this.

No, it wasn't.

most of the escaping EMF radiation was directed upwards

EMP is not EMF radiation. It seems you do not know the first thing about EMP and nuclear weapons: what EMP is, what the timing of the pulse is relative to the blast (synchronized to the microsecond), what EMP would look like in a remote UHF TV broadcast, pretty much any single thing.

EMP radiates spherically because it is a magnetic field effect. EMP from a nuclear blast occurs timed with the blast. The interference you posted a video is nothing like what EMP would do, it looks like simple antenna misalignment or loss of line-of-sight for a UHF antenna.

Sorry, man, you're the one believing a crazy theory. The evidence for thermite was already huge and keeps growing. There are videos of steel beams rocketing away from the blast, accelerating faster than gravity, because thermite burning on one side of them is acting as a propellant.

I don't need to answer your strawman fallacies. You're making a joke by describing EMPs and providing evidence that confirms you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

EMF = ElectroMagnetic Frequency

EMP = ElectroMagnetic Pulse

"Oooo completely different!!" Same thing, silly. Stop confusing people, especially yourself.

For those having trouble visualizing an underground nuke and the timing of the collapse, here's an excellent video example.

First, notice the detonation causing a ground-based blast wave -- i.e., earthquake. Then about 10 seconds later, the ground collapses. Imagine one of these under each WTC building.

So, with that in mind, watch the EMP video:

• EMP Evidence From Nuclear Detonation at 9/11

When the interference hits, that's detonation. Start the countdown...

• 10
• 9
• 8
• 7
• 6
• 5
• 4
• 3
• 2
• 1

COLLAPSE

EMF = ElectroMagnetic Frequency EMP = ElectroMagnetic Pulse "Oooo completely different!!" Same thing, silly. Stop confusing people, especially yourself.

Completely different things, silly. Stop being confused.

Look up the difference between "far field" EM and "near field" EM. One declines in power with 1/r^2, the other 1/r^3. You don't know which is which.

You're completely ignorant of physics and I went to Caltech. GTFO.

You're completely ignorant of physics and I went to Caltech. GTFO.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA is there any way you could use that as a sig?? ...Oh God my sides...

It's not something I would expect a completely ignorant but self-assured person to respect. Whereas to intelligent readers, the respect is inherent.

No, Caltech boy, let me know when you get your master's degree. Let me know when you're published.

Hell, let me know when you get your first engineering job and are no longer shilling for the City of London.

Well, let's record this forever. You think EMP and EMF are the same things. That means any reasoning from you based on physics is fallacious.

An ElectroMagnetic Pulse (EMP) is an intense pulse of ElectroMagnetic Frequency (EMF), you dumb shit.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse#General_characteristics

My God, you guys are really scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to confuse people here.

No, it really isn't. Looking to wikipedia for physics is the last resort of the ignorant.

You're completely ignorant of physics and I went to Caltech. GTFO.

hehhehee Ahhhh seriously I'm dyin here

That's nice. You're one of the most ignorant posters in this sub, and you're celebrating it. I couldn't make you look more stupid than your own posts do.

Ok Caltech boy.

It's totally OK with me that you feel inadequate. You are inadequate.

What they stand to gain is not being indicted for a few thousand counts of first degree murder, treason, and/or war crimes.

What is disconcerting is that, if the same terrorists who hijacked the planes sneaked into the building beforehand and also planted a bunch of synchronized explosives (sidebar: and if those explosives were going to knock down the building anyway, why roll the dice with the whole plane thing in the first place), well, to put it in layman's terms, someone fucked up. People sneaking in here and bombing America is actually something the FBI, DoD, et. al. is supposed to prevent. Especially given that target is the same one from 8 years earlier.

Now, to be sure, most Americans wouldn't notice and/or care unless the whole episode somehow affected what was on TV or Kanye seemed forlorn, because as a nation we are concerned with important things like how much air is in a football and whether or not Jesus wants homosexuals to get married. But there would be those few that would agitate for a rational explanation. And there wouldn't be one.

TL;DR To entertain the honest answers to these questions is unAmerican. You had better sound off that you love the Patriot Act.

Because it would've been impossible for a bunch of Saudi/Pakistani jihadis to do that.

In order for any of that to happen, they would need someone who has security clearance to give them security clearance. Security there was very high level, considering the residents who had office space. Infiltration would be on a 2% chance scale (imo). It's far more likely it was a CIA/MOSSAD black op.

The same reason they killed JFK. The CIA are not the good guys you think they are...

Compartmentalization of the MIC. You think that black ops aren't going on in the world, that only those who "need to know" know about it? Also, you say that to their would be too many people who know. That's not true, it would only of taken a few black op agents (I personally think they were foreigners, most likely Mossad). Think of it this way. The general government had no idea, a small group knew about planes and were complicit, and an even smaller group knew about the demo plan. It's all speculation, but it makes sense to me, considering the events of that day.

I would say we get into the question: which CIA? When the President changes parties, high-level operatives in the CIA leave the real CIA and move to either the Continuity of Government CIA, or the really-secret underground CIA that forms for the out-of-power party.

If I was writing the screenplay, I'd have some Pakistani subcontractor on the janitor team plant bombs in the toilets or something.

It would have been more believable than the official story, "no those two buildings didn't just blow up, they fell down. Then this other building fell down. No, we had no idea this was coming. Look over there while I destroy all physical evidence."